Why this Blog ?
News articles in the Wide World of Web, quite often disappear with time, when they are relocated as archives with a different url. Archives in this blog serve as a library for those who are interested in doing Research on Aadhaar Related Topics. Articles are published with details of original publication date and the url.

Aadhaar

The UIDAI has taken two successive governments in India and the entire world for a ride. It identifies nothing. It is not unique. The entire UID data has never been verified and audited. The UID cannot be used for governance, financial databases or anything. It’s use is the biggest threat to national security since independence. – Anupam Saraph 2018

When I opposed Aadhaar in 2010 , I was called a BJP stooge. In 2016 I am still opposing Aadhaar for the same reasons and I am told I am a Congress die hard. No one wants to see why I oppose Aadhaar as it is too difficult. Plus Aadhaar is FREE so why not get one ? Ram Krishnaswamy

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.-Mahatma Gandhi

In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.Mahatma Gandhi

“The invasion of privacy is of no consequence because privacy is not a fundamental right and has no meaning under Article 21. The right to privacy is not a guaranteed under the constitution, because privacy is not a fundamental right.” Article 21 of the Indian constitution refers to the right to life and liberty -Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi

“There is merit in the complaints. You are unwittingly allowing snooping, harassment and commercial exploitation. The information about an individual obtained by the UIDAI while issuing an Aadhaar card shall not be used for any other purpose, save as above, except as may be directed by a court for the purpose of criminal investigation.”-A three judge bench headed by Justice J Chelameswar said in an interim order.

Legal scholarUsha Ramanathandescribes UID as an inverse of sunshine laws like the Right to Information. While the RTI makes the state transparent to the citizen, the UID does the inverse: it makes the citizen transparent to the state, she says.

Good idea gone bad I have written earlier that UID/Aadhaar was a poorly designed, unreliable and expensive solution to the really good idea of providing national identification for over a billion Indians. My petition contends that UID in its current form violates the right to privacy of a citizen, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. This is because sensitive biometric and demographic information of citizens are with enrolment agencies, registrars and sub-registrars who have no legal liability for any misuse of this data. This petition has opened up the larger discussion on privacy rights for Indians. The current Article 21 interpretation by the Supreme Court was done decades ago, before the advent of internet and today’s technology and all the new privacy challenges that have arisen as a consequence.Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP Rajya Sabha

“What is Aadhaar? There is enormous confusion. That Aadhaar will identify people who are entitled for subsidy. No. Aadhaar doesn’t determine who is eligible and who isn’t,” Jairam Ramesh

But Aadhaar has been mythologised during the previous government by its creators into some technology super force that will transform governance in a miraculous manner. I even read an article recently that compared Aadhaar to some revolution and quoted a 1930s historian, Will Durant.Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Rajya Sabha MP

“I know you will say that it is not mandatory. But, it is compulsorily mandatorily voluntary,” Jairam Ramesh, Rajya Saba April 2017.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the World; indeed it's the only thing that ever has"

“Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.” -Edward Snowden

In the Supreme Court, Meenakshi Arora, one of the senior counsel in the case, compared it to living under a general, perpetual, nation-wide criminal warrant.

Had never thought of it that way, but living in the Aadhaar universe is like living in a prison. All of us are treated like criminals with barely any rights or recourse and gatekeepers have absolute power on you and your life.

Announcing the launch of the#BreakAadhaarChainscampaign, culminating with events in multiple cities on 12th Jan. This is the last opportunity to make your voice heard before the Supreme Court hearings start on 17th Jan 2018. In collaboration with @no2uidand@rozi_roti.

UIDAI's security seems to be founded on four time tested pillars of security idiocy

1) Denial

2) Issue fiats and point finger

3) Shoot messenger

4) Bury head in sand.

God Save India

Thursday, July 20, 2017

11614 - The Supreme Court’s Refusal To Stay The Requirement Of Aadhaar For Income-Tax Returns Raises Several Troubling Questions

The Supeme Court failed to address the necessity of providing an Aadhaar number for filing income-tax returns, leaving open the possibility that a failure to do so would invite penal consequences.

The Supreme Court’s recent judgment in the case of Binoy Viswam vsUnion of India is the latest in a series of developments with respect to Aadhaar, the central government’s program to provide unique identification numbers to all residents of India. In the judgment, which was pronounced on 9 June, the court was adjudicating a challenge to Section 139AA of the Income Tax Act. The section was introduced into the Income Tax Act as a part of the Finance Act in April 2017. It included two controversial mandates: that all individuals seeking to file income-tax returns or apply for a fresh Permanent Account Number (PAN) card after 1 July 2017 must quote their Aadhaar number in the return or application; and that a failure to link a PAN card allotted before 1 July to an Aadhaar number or Aadhaar enrolment number would result in the invalidation of the PAN card. While the Supreme Court has read down the latter to mean that a PAN card will not get invalidated if a person does not obtain an Aadhaar card, it failed to address the necessity of providing an Aadhaar number for filing income-tax returns, leaving open the possibility that a failure to do so would invite penal consequences.

The Aadhaar programme has been controversial since its introduction in 2009. As Aadhaar cards were used for welfare schemes, such as the transfer of domestic gas subsidies, or benefits under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme, several civil society organisations, social activists and privacy-law experts raised concerns with respect to data protection and possible invasions of privacy. In August 2015, while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the validity of the Aadhaar scheme, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court referred the cases to a higher bench on the question of whether the constitution enshrines a right to privacy that is violated by the biometric-data collection for Aadhaar enrolment. In October 2015, the Supreme Court directed that enrolment in the Aadhaar programme would be purely voluntary, and that the Aadhaar number “cannot be made mandatory till the matter is finally decided by this Court one way or the other.”

The central government, however, took every possible step to expand the Aadhaar programme. In 2016, Arun Jaitley, the finance minister, introduced the Aadhaar Bill as a money bill in the Lok Sabha, which meant that the Rajya Sabha would have no powers to reject the bill. Despite criticism over the manner of its introduction, the bill was passed, leading to the enactment of the Aadhaar Act in March 2016. In 2017, the government introduced Section 139AA into the Income Tax Act and the section was then challenged before the Supreme Court on grounds of unconstitutionality.

In Binoy Viswam, the Supreme Court only read down Section 139AA to a very limited extent. It found the first part of the section—which provides that it is mandatory for income-tax assessee to provide an Aadhaar number in her application for a PAN card and in her income-tax returns—to be constitutionally valid. The court, however, stayed the operation of the second part of the section, which states that a failure to link a PAN card with an Aadhaar card would invalidate the PAN card from the date of its issuance. The court noted that the invalidation of a PAN card would have several serious consequences, such as making the holder of an invalid card incapable of obtaining a bank loan of more than Rs 50,000 or depositing the same amount in a bank account. The court therefore read down a retrospective application of the law, according to which someone who does not possess an Aadhaar card before 1 July cannot be compelled to link it to their PAN card. It noted: “Those assessees who are not Aadhaar card holders and do not comply with the provision of Section 139(2), their PAN cards be not treated as invalid for the time being.” However, the court has upheld the prospective application, and anyone already possessing an Aadhaar card would necessarily have to comply with the second part of the section.

The stay on the second part of Section 139AA provides little relief to persons who do not possess Aadhaar cards because the Supreme Court has not expressed any views on how individuals without Aadhaar cards may file their tax returns from this year. It appears that the section has been read down only with respect to the invalidity of PAN cards, and to a limited extent at that, considering any fresh applications for a PAN card will require the applicant to quote her Aadhaar number. The rest of the Supreme Court’s order raises a number of concerns.

First, the court did not clarify the effect of the order with respect to the second part of the section and the filing of income-tax returns. It appears to agree with the central government’s framing of the act, which imposes a penalty of invalidation of PAN cards on a failure to link it to an Aadhaar number. The judgment states that “it cannot be denied that there has to be some provision stating the consequences for not complying with the requirements of Section 139AA of the Act.” However, it is ambiguous as to whether the court is referring to the requirements under the first part of the section, which makes it mandatory for a taxpayer to quote her Aadhaar number in her income-tax returns and PAN card applications, or to the second part, which requires Aadhaar card holders to link their Aadhaar number with their PAN card. It further notes that it is the prerogative of the legislature to impose penalties. Otherwise, “if those persons who violate Section 139AA of the Act without any consequence [sic], the provision shall be rendered toothless.”

The judgment does not, however, elaborate on what those consequences might be. Nor does it clarify whether the consequences would apply to those without Aadhaar cards, considering it read down the retrospective application of the section. The court proceeds to state that the “requirement of giving Aadhaar enrolment number to the designated authority or stating this number in the income tax returns is directly connected with the issue of duplicate/fake PANs.” However, it stops short of discussing whether this is necessary for those without Aadhaar cards, or the consequences of a failure to state the Aadhaar number in the income-tax returns.

The court has therefore chosen to remain silent on the most pressing question before it—whether the absence of an Aadhaar number would invalidate tax returns filed after July 2017. This in turn means that taxpayers are still unclear on the consequences of failing to obtain or to furnish an Aadhaar number. The Income Tax Act provides that both a failure to furnish tax returns, and a failure to report one’s PAN in these returns entail penalties, under sections 271F and 272B of the act. Section 271F imposes a penalty of Rs 5,000 for a failure to furnish a return on income, whereas Section 272B imposes a penalty of Rs 10,000 for a failure to quote the permanent account number in the income-tax returns. Of even greater concern is Section 276CC, which mandates that the failure to file income-tax returns by the end of the assessment year is an offence punishable with a minimum imprisonment of three months, and a maximum of seven years.

The court’s judgment, however, provides no clarity as to whether any of these provisions would apply to a person who does not quote her Aadhaar number in her income-tax returns. Meanwhile, on 10 June, the day after the court pronounced its judgment, the Central Board of Direct Taxes issued a press release on the “effect of the judgment.” The CBDT has stated that the first part of Section 139AA still stands and anyone filing their tax returns after 1 July will need to quote their Aadhaar number. It is pertinent to note that in 2001, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs Anjum Ghaswala, the Supreme Court held that press releases, unlike circulars, do not bind income-tax authorities.

Secondly, the order acknowledges that a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court is yet to hear and pass orders on the question of Aadhaar and the possible violation of a right to privacy, but does not examine the impact of such a ruling on Section 139AA. The court recorded that concerns of a data leak are real, and that the parliament should look to pass a data-protection legislation. However, this is only a suggestion to the legislature, and there is no further analysis of the issue. What if, for instance, the constitution bench were to find that mandatory enrolment in Aadhaar violates a right to privacy, and citizens should have the option of remaining outside the Aadhaar programme? The decision would be meaningless for the citizens who would now be compelled to obtain Aadhaar cards in order to file their tax returns after 1 July. The data obtained from them would already exist on the government’s servers.

In upholding the validity of Section 139AA, the court relied extensively on the central government’s submissions that this was a step taken to prevent money laundering and tax evasion, and to root out black money. The court reasoned that the problem of black money had reached “alarming proportions” and that all steps had to be taken to “root out the menace.” This is of little comfort to citizens concerned about the possibility of a data leak, and the misuse of information provided. If biometric information is already provided to the government through a mandatory process, any questions of privacy become academic.

Thirdly, the court notes that the Income Tax Act and the Aadhaar Act operate in different fields. It states that the introduction of the new Section 139AA in the Income Tax Act is “to check a menace of black money as well as money laundering,” whereas the Aadhaar Act is to “avail the benefits of schemes and services.” As a result, the court held, the earlier rulings that Aadhaar would remain voluntary would not affect the competence of the legislature to introduce the new section. This appears not to consider that linking an Aadhaar number to a PAN has practically the same effect—citizens must file income-tax returns, or face penal consequences. Moreover, it appears to set a dangerous precedent, by permitting legislatures to reverse judicial decisions by passing laws in slightly different contexts. The Supreme Court’s order in August 2015 specified that Aadhaar “will not be used by the respondents for any purpose other than the PDS Scheme and in particular for the purpose of distribution of foodgrains, etc. and cooking fuel, such as kerosene. The Aadhaar card may also be used for the purpose of the LPG Distribution Scheme.” In its October 2015 order, the court added four other schemes for which the Aadhaar could be used. On a plain reading, this appears to exclude the use of Aadhaar numbers for all other purposes—including for income tax.

Finally, the reluctance of the court to look closely at questions with respect to Aadhaar is particularly troubling in light of the government’s backtracking on its promises. Since 2015, the government has reiterated that enrolment in the Aadhaar programme is voluntary. The court also took note of this, stating that: “Fact remains that as per the Government and UIDAI itself, the requirement of obtaining Aadhaar number is voluntary. … Thus, enrolment under Aadhaar is voluntary.” By introducing the new provision, the government has done indirectly what they had promised not to do directly—Aadhaar enrolment may not expressly be mandatory, but citizens must enrol if they are to file income tax returns.

In only partially staying Section 139AA, it appears that the Supreme Court has missed an opportunity to address some crucial questions as to the implications of the Aadhaar programme, and leaves open several questions. Several challenges to the programme now remain pending before the court—one, that is to listed be heard at the end of this month that challenges the notifications making the Aadhaar card mandatory for 17 different welfare schemes; another that challenges the passage of the Aadhaar Act as a money bill; and a larger constitution bench is to be constituted to hear the challenge to the programme with respect to potential violations to the right to privacy. In Binoy Viswam, the Supreme Court did not hear any arguments on the right to privacy, and passed the judgment subject to the decision made by the constitution bench. It remains to be seen what impact these judgments will have on the Aadhaar programme and the changes, if any, that it will bring to citizens’ lives.

"All we have to show for the hundreds of thousands of crore spent on Aadhar is a Congress ticket for Nilekani" Yashwant Sinha.(27/02/2014)

TV Mohandas Pai, former chief financial officer and head of human resources, tweeted: "selling his soul for power; made his money in the company wedded to meritocracy." Money Life Article

Nilekani’s reporting structure is unprecedented in history; he reports directly to the Prime Minister, thus bypassing all checks and balances in government - Home Minister Chidambaram

To refer to Aadhaar as an anti corruption tool despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary is mystifying. That it is now officially a Rs.50,000 Crores solution searching for an explanation is also without any doubt. -- Statement by Rajeev Chandrasekhar, MP & Member, Standing Committee on Finance

Finance minister P Chidambaram’s statement, in an exit interview to this newspaper, that Aadhaar needs to be re-thought completely is probably the last nail in its coffin. :-) Financial Express

The Rural Development Ministry headed byJairam Rameshcreated a road Block and refused to make Aadhaar mandatory for making wage payment to people enrolled under the world’s largest social security scheme NRGA unless all residents are covered.

What People Opposed to Aadhaar said:

Aadhaar is not compulsory — it is just a voluntary “facility.” UIDAI's concept note stresses that “enrolment will not be mandated.” But there is a catch: “... benefits and services that are linked to the UID will ensure demand for the number.” This is like selling bottled water in a village after poisoning the well, and claiming that people are buying water voluntarily. The next sentence is also ominous: “This will not, however, preclude governments or Registrars from mandating enrolment.”

John Dreze,Visiting Prof of Economics, Uni of Allahabad, Ex-NAC Member

UID project is full of ambiguity, confusions and suspicions, but no answers -Usha Ramanathan

The Reserve Bank says Aadhaar is not good enough to open a bank account

You can Beat the UID reader with candle wax and Fevicol - J.T.D Souza

The very premise of Aadhar is flawed

It is a certification that those who claim to think on behalf of India or its underprivileged understand it so differently from the beneficiaries they think of.

In a nutshell, Aadhar will not bring about any of the benefits that are intended for its intended beneficiaries. Because that will be solving a problem of governance by adding another layer, that is imaginary and unnecessary.

To call it "technological leadership" is as removed from reality as calling a reader a writer of the book. At best it will mean that we can take a technology and ram it down the throat of the poor while other nations with stronger democratic roots and respect for citizens have not been able to do so for reasons of building consensus.

"Aadhar" is like dropping a car by helicopter in a village where there is no road and hope every villager can reach wherever they may want to go.

For anyone willing to think, Aadhar is a reflection of the huge disconnect that India has from both the world of the under privileged and the rest of the world.

Aadhaar the Last Nail in UPA II's Coffin

"All we have to show for the hundreds of thousands of crore spent on Aadhar is a Congress ticket for Nilekani" Yashwant Sinha.(27/02/2014)

UID NOT UBIQUITOUS ANY LONGER MR. NILEKANI - TRUTH HAS PREVAILED JUST BEFORE THE ELECTIONS.

WhatsApp gained users because it was useful, and people wanted to download and use it. Aadhaar, sadly, cannot be said to have "users" yet. There are as yet few uses. This is why Mr Nilekani has to emphasise the number of enrolments, not the benefits that flow from Aadhaar - because those exist today only in theory. And the simple fact is that enrolments should not be seen as a sign of success. The Only Good Idea - Business Standard

"Loyalty to the country always. Loyalty to the government when it deserves it." - Mark Twain

TV Mohandas Pai, former chief financial officer and head of human resources, tweeted: "selling his soul for power; made his money in the company wedded to meritocracy." Money Life Article

The expose shows how citizens of Nepal and Bangladesh are offered Aadhaar cards without identity proof. The sting reveals that even MLAs and gazetted officers sign on the forged documents to make Aadhaar cards. IBN Live

To refer to Aadhaar as an anti corruption tool despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary is mystifying. That it is now officially a Rs.50,000 Crores solution searching for an explanation is also without any doubt. -- Statement by Rajeev Chandrasekhar,MP & Member, Standing Committee on Finance

Finance minister P Chidambaram’s statement, in an exit interview to this newspaper, that Aadhaar needs to be re-thought completely is probably the last nail in its coffin. :-) Financial Express

Please think through before supporting UID/ Aadhaar, so you do not regret your decision.

Emphasising the need for separation of powers, James Madison bluntly observed in his essay, Federalist 51."Because men are not angels," they need government to prevent them, by force when necessary, from invading the lives, property, and liberty of their fellow citizens. He also noted that the same non-angelic men can wield the government’s coercive machinery to use it tyrannically—even in a democracy.

·The Rural Development Ministry headed by Jairam Ramesh created a road Block and refused to make Aadhaar mandatory for making wage payment to people enrolled under the world’s largest social security scheme NRGA unless all residents are covered.

·Nilekani’s reporting structure is unprecedented in history; he reports directly to the Prime Minister, thus bypassing all checks and balances in government - Home Minister Chidambaram

·AaAdhaar is not compulsory — it is just a voluntary “facility.” UIDAI's concept note stresses that “enrolment will not be mandated.” But there is a catch: “... benefits and services that are linked to the UID will ensure demand for the number.” This is like selling bottled water in a village after poisoning the well, and claiming that people are buying water voluntarily. The next sentence is also ominous: “This will not, however, preclude governments or Registrars from mandating enrolment.” John Dreze, Visiting Prof of Economics, Uni of Allahabad, Ex-NAC Member

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”Mahatma Gandhi

"Protest is not something you delegate, politics is not something you outsource. It is what you stand for literally"Shiv Visvanathan, Indian Express.

"Whenever I despair, I remember that the way of truth and love has always won. There may be tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they may seem invincible, but in the end, they always fail. Think of it: always. "Mahatma Gandhi

"The function of a civil resistance is to provoke response and we will continue to provoke until they respond or change the law. They are not in control; we are."Mahatma Gandhi

"Let us begin by being clear... about General Smuts' new law. All Indians must now be fingerprinted... like criminals. Men and women. No marriage other than a Christian marriage is considered valid. Under this act our wives and mothers are whores. And every man here is a bastard."-Mahatma Gandhi

"It is easy to laugh at people who fire arrows at helicopter gunships, but on the other hand it is not so easy to defeat people who are willing to fire arrows at helicopter gunships."Vietnam: A War Lost And Won' authored by Nigel Cawthorne

You can fool all the people sometimes,You can fool some people all the time,But you cannot fool all the people all the time.Truth Shall prevail.Satyameva Jayate.

Aadhaar was meant to deduplicate peoples id's and Aadhaar itself is a Duplicate of NPR and needs deduplication according to Expenditure Finance Committee (EFC) headed by Secretary Sumit Bose.

Which is the bigger crime a poor family double dipping on PDS to stay alive or Govt wasting mega bucks on a white elephant called Aadhaar ?

Remember Aadhaar is not an ID card but just a Number to authenticate and tell you if you are in fact you and UIDAI will splurge Rs1.5 lakh crores ( Rs 1,500, 000, 000,000 ) in the next five years. What do people with Aadhaar get in return ? A lot of empty promises. It won't take long for people in India to wake up and understand what is going on.

How do we explain Loss of Privacy?Privacy is like our VISION.We will appreciate its loss when we go BLIND.

Massive collection of Video Clips on Unique Identity. Click on this Link http://flotadaslimaymedio.com.ar/tag/unique-identification/orderby-relevance/page1.html

WHAT AM I ?????"Yes, it is voluntary. But the service providers might make it mandatory. In the long run, I wouldn't call it compulsory. I would rather say that it will become ubiquitous"Nandan Nilekani, UIDAI Chairman (Excerpts from a conversation with Sadiq Naqvi and Akash Bisht) Answer: Aadhaar, the Unique Identity number & a Bar Code that each and every Indian will be branded with linked to a National Database maintained by UIDAI, with Help from L1 Identity a US Multinational.

"Opponents of the Aadhaar number have included advocates of privacy rights. The number however, is linked to limited personal information, with no profiling data included. Submitting a father’s name for example, is not required, allowing residents to adopt any name of their choosing and free themselves from caste identification."Nandan Nilekani's personal Opinion1061 - We have your number - OUTLOOK

Do all Indians want to become Numbers and be tracked like animals ?Do we have a Choice ?

IF IT TAKES SIX MONTHS TO ISSUE ONE MILLION NOT SO UINQUE IDENTITIES, HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO ISSUE 600 MILLION OR 1.2 BILLION UNIQUE IDENTITIES ?

WORDS OF WISDOM

“In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place.”Mahatma Gandhi"I have never known legislation of this nature being directed against free men in any part of the world. I know that indentured Indians in Natal are subject to a drastic system of passes, but these poor fellows can hardly be classed as free men."Mahatma Gandhi"...giving of finger prints, required by the Ordinance, was quite a novelty in South Africa. With a view to seeing some literature on the subject, I read a volume on finger impressions by Mr. Henry, a police officer, from which I gathered that finger prints were required by law only from criminals."Mahatma Gandhi"Democracy was the greatest gift of our freedom struggle to the people of India. Independence made the nation free. Democracy made our people free. A free people are a people who are governed by their will and ruled with their consent. A free people are a people who participate in decisions affecting their lives and their destinies".Rajiv Gandhi “How shall a democracy ensure its secret intelligence apparatus becomes neither a vehicle for conspiracy nor a suppressor of traditional liberties of democratic self-government?”Vice-President Hamid Ansari, Hi-tech without Panchayati Raj is just a bogus stunt for geeks and nerds."Mani Shankar Aiyar, Congress leaderAadhaar is not compulsory — it is just a voluntary “facility.” UIDAI's concept note stresses that “enrolment will not be mandated.” But there is a catch: “... benefits and services that are linked to the UID will ensure demand for the number.” This is like selling bottled water in a village after poisoning the well, and claiming that people are buying water voluntarily. The next sentence is also ominous: “This will not, however, preclude governments or Registrars from mandating enrolment.”John Dreze, Visiting Prof of Economics, Uni of Allahabad, National Advisory Committee Member"It is a Bad Idea to Marry UID with NREGA"Reetika Kehera"Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men."Ayn Rand “The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy”.Alex Carey, a noted Australian activist."People willing to trade freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."Ben Franklin.Liberty has never come from the government; it has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it."Woodrow Wilson"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".Edmund Burke"Among a people generally corrupt liberty cannot long exist".Edmund Burke"Clearly, there is no longer such a thing as a safe electronic archive, whatever computing's snake-oil salesmen claim. No organisation can treat digitised communication as confidential. An electronic secret is a contradiction in terms".Simon Jenkins, Guardian UK“Privacy is not something that people feel, except in its absence. Remove it and you destroy something at the heart of being human.”Phil Booth, National co-ordinator of the campaign No2IDIn reality, Aadhaar intrudes into people's privacy that is hidden under the guise of reaching out.Srijit Mishra

Ten things you must know about UID

Some facts about the UID project that Indian residents should be aware of:

1. Aadhaar (the UID number) is not mandatory. People can choose not to be a part of the exercise.2. It is not restricted to Indian citizens only and is meant for residents of India, irrespective of their citizenship. An Aadhaar card does not establish citizenship of India, it is meant for identification.3. Even people without proper identification documents can apply for Aadhaar. Authorised individuals, who already have an Aadhaar, can introduce residents who don't possess any documents to establish their identity to enable them to receive their Aadhaar.4. Aadhar will not replace other identification documents such as ration card or passport.5. The UIDAI will collect only biometric and demographic information about an individual and will not ask for info on caste, religion or language.6. Date of Birth is optional (for people who don't remember/know their date of birth) and approximate age will suffice.7. Transgenders have been included in the options under gender and they need not classify themselves as male or female.8. Residents of India have an option to link their UID number to their bank accounts.9. To get an UID number residents will have to go to the nearest Aadhaar enrollment camp, details of which will be published in the local media. Residents will have to carry along certain documents, mentioned in the advertisement. Residents will also be photographed and have their fingerprints and iris scanned. The Aadhaar numbers will be issued within 20-30 days.10. The draft National Identification Authority of India bill has provisions against impersonation, providing false information and for protection of personal information collected by the UIDAI. Violations can attract penalties in the form of fines of up to Rs 1 crore and imprisonment extending up to a life term.